DiabloWags said:
Project Veritas - Wikipedia
Co-Founder Larry Sanger: Wikipedia is "Badly Biased"
Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger conducted his own bias analysis of the website, saying Wikipedia is "badly biased."
"The days of Wikipedia's robust commitment to neutrality are long gone," co-founder Larry Sanger told Fox News in Feb. 2021. "Wikipedia's ideological and religious bias is real and troubling, particularly in a resource that continues to be treated by many as an unbiased reference work."
"Wikipedia can be counted on to cover not just political figures, but political issues as well from a liberal-left point of view," Sanger writes. "No conservative would write, in an
abortion article, "When properly done, abortion is
one of the safest procedures in medicine," a claim that is questionable on its face, considering what an invasive, psychologically distressing, and sometimes lengthy procedure it can be even when done according to modern medical practices."
Wikipedia Criticized for Neutrality Policies that Omit InformationWikipedia says that it does not present certain minority views or claims in order to "avoid a false balance." This new policy has been criticized by Sanger, who says it means Wikipedia is no longer neutral. Wikipedia states that it seeks to avoid legitimizing certain information and will omit it. In this way, Wikipedia adheres to an
elite bias or perhaps a majority-belief bias.
Wikipedia's
policy states, "Giving "equal validity" can create a false balance" (emphasis ours):
Quote:
While it is important to account for all significant viewpoints on any topic, Wikipedia policy does not state or imply that every minority view or extraordinary claim needs to be presented along with commonly accepted mainstream scholarship as if they were of equal validity. There are many such beliefs in the world, some popular and some little-known: claims that the Earth is flat, that the Knights Templar possessed the Holy Grail, that the Apollo moon landings were a hoax, and similar ones. Conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, speculative history, or plausible but currently unaccepted theories should not be legitimized through comparison to accepted academic scholarship. We do not take a stand on these issues as encyclopedia writers, for or against; we merely omit this information where including it would unduly legitimize it, and otherwise include and describe these ideas in their proper context with respect to established scholarship and the beliefs of the wider world.